"Lester claims that Open Ocean later simply copied the proprietary GA/Campbell Bonzer toe-in angle shamelessly (and illegally) because it works."

Well noshuzbluz, in a feeble attempt to cover up his tracks, isobars came up with the above revision, to include other changes in another post to you. Clearly, he didn't like having his ass hanging out for everyone to see, and then later, hold him accountable for making totally inappropriate comments. He knew he blew it big time, but predictably, he won't cop to his crimes and offer an apology. Now you know when he puffs up later claiming that he's only blown it a handful of times in over 20 zillion posts, you've got the goods to pin him to the wall. Still though, being ever the weasel, he'll simply deny it, or brush you off in a rude manner like he did in his last post.

One more thing noshuzbluz, you just may have made it on isobars' killfile list of "PLONKED" folks. It's well over 30 folks now, and it's ever growing. Needless to say, the fact that he has a list of censored folks and brags about it often says more about him and his inability to get along well with others than anything else.

2. Slander and libel involve statements known to be false, a daily occurrence among the lefties here.

3. The party who made that accusation is the party who owns the license. It was his call whether to file suit, and would be the court's call whether it's valid.

4. Your and my third party opinions do not determine the validity of the claim.

5. The loons and a few well-meaning truth-seekers put mirrors in my face daily. So far they've spotted ... what? ... 4 or 5 errors in 20 years? Too bad I'm not paid cash for accuracy in this job.

SNIP about irrelevancies

1. Mike, slander is verbal because it uses words. Slander also is oral because it's typically limited to the spoken word. Defamation also is verbal because it uses written words but not oral. Before you spout the law, please consult the dictionary.

2. Defamation (slander or otherwise) does not always require the publisher/speaker's knowing falsity of the claim. In some cases, only the lack of knowledge in the accuracy of what is published if the person either has a reason to know or a reason to investigate, and that can hinge on the nature of the statement or the subject or target of the publication.

3. Mr. Fick, be aware that publishing to a third person a comment of another that alleges illegal activity of a business may be slander per se -especially without any prior adjudication of fact or law. In other words, you may have just committed the slanderous act. Well played.

4. Exactly. Please re-read my third point.

5. Good thing too, as our subscription and ad money would be gone to waste. Not unlike . . ._________________Support Your Sport. Join US Windsurfing!
www.USWindsurfing.org

Thank you, Dan, for supporting every statement I made, point by point. I'm surprised you'd bother. Even #4 supports my lesser-known legal freedom to repeat the statement, as there were several parties to the discussion in which I heard about it and the toe-in "feud", for lack of a better term, went on for some time.

But, guys, that conflict was two decades ago. Its only relevance now is the light it sheds on the long history of multiple assymetrical WS board fins. That wheel's been spinning since before Lewinski became a verb.

C'mon guys, this is an internet forum!
We're going to have different points of view, none always better than another.
Mike worked for a magazine, possibly PerformanceWindsurfing, a VERY good technical rag with great insight and points of view. His points are certainly at least as valid as anyone elses.
You can slander me, I only worked at windsurf shops from 1983 until 2003, so I won't know anything of value for any of you.
While toe in is a nice feature on certain performance objectives, it's not the end all or even a majority performance option. Lots of things like rocker, outline template, thickness flow, rail flow, and bottom contour affect the turning of the board just as much as toe in and asymetrical fins.
Not sure of the reason for the slander of my being on Swaylocks. I think I post some very valid comments, and regrading twin fins specifically, since I'd been riding them starting late '60's, and still have one in my quiver, my points can't be all bull and cr.p.
Once again, toe in is not necessary if you curve the template at the side fin, and add some rocker there.
By removing toe in, and using symetrical fins, the boards go faster in a straight line, drop into waves faster, and sail closer to a single fin. Nothing wrong with that.

Alternate universe in the Tri-Cities? Mike, for the record, I refuted your post, pointed out that your failure to be specific amounts to an incorrect statement of the law, suggested that YOU may have just committed the party foul of defamation you suggest others did within the thread's contextual subject and finished with sarcasm at your expense. I trust most people got it as intended.

No need to thank me. Just get to learning. Yeah, I know, you had your invisible front-end box down for service, or you peaked, or someone IM'd you to read or whatever._________________Support Your Sport. Join US Windsurfing!
www.USWindsurfing.org

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forumYou can attach files in this forumYou can download files in this forum